↓ Skip to main content

Locally ablative treatment of breast cancer liver metastases: identification of factors influencing survival (the Mammary Cancer Microtherapy and Interventional Approaches (MAMMA MIA) study)

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Locally ablative treatment of breast cancer liver metastases: identification of factors influencing survival (the Mammary Cancer Microtherapy and Interventional Approaches (MAMMA MIA) study)
Published in
BMC Cancer, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12885-015-1499-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Max Seidensticker, Benjamin Garlipp, Sophia Scholz, Konrad Mohnike, Felix Popp, Ingo Steffen, Ricarda Seidensticker, Patrick Stübs, Maciej Pech, Maciej PowerskI, Peter Hass, Serban-Dan Costa, Holger Amthauer, Christiane Bruns, Jens Ricke

Abstract

Liver metastases from breast cancer (LMBC) are typically considered to indicate systemic disease spread and patients are most often offered systemic palliative treatment only. However, retrospective studies suggest that some patients may have improved survival with local treatment of their liver metastases compared to systemic therapy alone. In the absence of randomized trials, it is important to identify patient characteristics indicating that benefit from local treatment can be expected. 59 patients undergoing radiofrequency ablation (RFA), interstitial brachytherapy (BT), or radioembolization (RE) of LMBC as a salvage treatment were studied. Potential factors influencing survival were analyzed in a multivariate Cox model. For factors identified to have an independent survival impact, Kaplan-Meier analysis and comparison of overall survival (OS) using the log-rank test was performed. Median OS following local interventional treatment was 21.9 months. Considering only factors evaluable at treatment initiation, maximum diameter of liver metastases (≥3.9 cm; HR: 3.1), liver volume (≥ 1376 mL; HR: 2.3), and history of prior chemotherapy (≥ 3 lines of treatment; HR: 2.5-2.6) showed an independent survival impact. When follow-up data were included in the analysis, significant factors were maximum diameter of liver metastases (≥ 3.9 cm; HR: 3.1), control of LMBC during follow-up (HR: 0.29), and objective response as best overall response (HR: 0.21). Neither the presence of any extrahepatic metastases nor presence of bone metastases only had a significant survival impact. Median OS was 38.7 vs. 16.1 months in patients with metastases < vs. ≥ 3.9 cm, 36.6 vs. 10.2 months for patients having objective response vs. stable/progressive disease, and 38.5 vs. 14.2 months for patients having controlled vs. non-controlled disease at follow-up. Local control of LMBC confers a survival benefit and local interventional treatment for LMBC should be studied in a randomized trial. Patients with small metastases and limited history of systemic LMBC treatment are most likely to benefit from local approaches. Limited extrahepatic disease should not lead to exclusion from a randomized study and should not be a contraindication for local LMBC treatment as long as no randomized data are available.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 2%
Unknown 58 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 14%
Student > Master 6 10%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Other 5 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 7%
Other 13 22%
Unknown 18 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 41%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 25 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 September 2020.
All research outputs
#6,045,262
of 22,816,807 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#1,480
of 8,300 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,507
of 262,658 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#25
of 152 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,816,807 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,300 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 262,658 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 152 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.